benjamin d wrote: » I think in team sports any player or team from any previous era (80s or earlier, for example) would be utterly demolished by even the lowest level of professional side these days if they were dropped in as they were in their prime. Training, S&C, and overall competition has moved on to a huge extent. The individual greats would still be great if they adhered to the standards of today, but throw Pele or Maradona or George Best as they were into a premiership or top international team today and they'd look embarrassingly bad very quickly I reckon.
cdeb wrote: » But surely, as I noted earlier in the thread, the significant improvement in fitness/strength and conditioning, the significant improvement in defending in general, and the evolution of their positions to become more all-round would stand against them? Look at the difference Arsene Wenger brought about by ending drinking culture and getting players to just look after themselves physically - and that was 20+ years ago now. Even the Brazil team of 1970 were astonishingly naive at times - they were still celebrating their opening goal against Italy when Italy tipped off, for example, and were all completely out of position and nearly conceded straight away - and I think they'd struggle to even qualify for the World Cup today. There's a video on YouTube somewhere - I couldn't find it with a brief search - of all their bad play, which gets overlooked these days because of the likes of Carlos Alberto's goal and Pele's misses. I know I'm repeating myself here, but I think it's a vital point in the context of the thread question - in fact, it ultimately is the question. Could Best, time-travelling, be as good a player today as back then? And my view, taking the above all into consideration, is that he'd be an improvement on Paddy McCourt. It'd be interesting to hear the contrary argument. Pele, Maradona, Best et al rightly deserve to be remembered as greats of their era; they advanced the game towards what we have today and I've no doubt if they joined a top team today as a junior, they could become a world class player today. But that's not the same as saying their heyday performances would stand out today. And I think the same goes for most sports, not just football.
OldRio wrote: » Looking at the other side of the coin. If a professional soccer player could be magically moved back in time to the 1960s or 1970s. I would imagine they would change their profession. Can you imagine some of these theatrical premadonas getting tackled by some of those defenders. Charlton or Chopper Harris to name just two. Comedy gold if you think of it. It would be carnage.
Clive wrote: » Russian wrestler Alexander Karelin, probably the most successful athlete most people have never heard of. At one stage he won six European Championships, six world Championships and Olympic gold without a single point being scored on him, never mind losing a match. That six year streak was broken when he was beaten in the Olympic final, winning silver, denying him four Olympic golds in four Games.
Mysterypunter wrote: » Loads of them. The first one to mind is the West Indies cricketers of the 70's & 80's. The best of all time
cdeb wrote: » The snooker player? Not a chance. Pick a random final - 1930 for example - and look at the scores. Highest break 79 over 37 frames? Wouldn't qualify you for the Crucible these days.
cdeb wrote: » Possibly - but that is a very different argument. It doesn't follow that Harris or Charlton would be any good in today's game. I think also the theatrics of a modern player is in large part because it's successful in gaining free kicks. If you put, say, Ronaldo back in the 60s, then he would stop the rolling around fairly quickly once he saw there was nothing to gain - but the flip side then, as you note, is that he'd get the ****e kicked out of him (as happened many players at the time of course, which is why the game moved to protect them). I think modern strength and conditioning is such that he'd probably stand up to the kicking a lot better than players at the time. The build of modern players is completely different to players from the 60s/70s. Yes, it would impact his game a bit, but as above, I don't think that's an argument for the idea that Best, Pele, etc, would be any good today.
OldRio wrote: » Sorry I don't think they could stand up to the kicking at all. They play a different game IMHO.
Berties_Horse wrote: » You're taking the proverbial. Snooker has vastly improved since the era of stodge, centuries are no longer a rare luxury.
cdeb wrote: » OK - and that's obviously a matter of opinion to some extent. Certainly the game was a lot rougher back in the day. And certainly players are a lot more physical (in terms of build) today. But again, it doesn't follow that Best, Pele, et al would be any use today.
Tombo2001 wrote: » I would strongly disagree - just because Ronaldo rolls over to get a free doesn't mean he hasn't gone through massive pain barriers to get where he is today. He is an incredibly hard working sports person. He works much harder than those guys from the 1960s.
OldRio wrote: » I would agree to the extent that a professional athlete has the opportunity to work on his fitness. But massive pain barriers? Watch a soccer game from the 60s or 70s and see what a tackle was those days.
